Bread_of_Life

Hi fiosh, Let me go through these one by one: I believed that the doctrine of there being no salvation outside of the church was tempered by the baptism , in that sincere non Catholics who through no fault of their own did not know of the church or that it was the true Church of Christ, could through responding to the calling of the Holy Spirit be baptised by desire. The catechism, for example, says:

Hi there Fiosh, I was wondering about the doctrine of baptism in voto. I am a member of the Church of Scotland, a reformed church that claims to be the (Scottish) branch of the Holy Catholic Church (although it protests against Rome). I know that our churches cannot celebrate communion together, because of our differences, but if I truly believe that my church is correct and the Holy Catholic Church, and through no fault of my own remain part of it and do not join the Roman Catholic Church - do I still recieve the sacrament of communion, and can I still be a member of the church in voto? Many thanks, Nikolai

Dinosaurs are an interesting case study in the fossil record, because they appear between two very sharp "cut-offs" in the fossil record. One the End-permian extinction, before which we find zero dinosaurs. And the other the K-T Boundary extinction, after which we find zero dinosaurs. Flood geology that. Of course, there are plenty such examples, dinos are just famous.

You've obviously not talked to me. It's a big statement saying that "nobody" can provide sound scientific proof of what they believe. I can. So can pretty much any geologist or physicist you speak to. They'll also be able to disspell the flawed creationist "proofs" that the earth is young. I suggest you ask one.

As may be, doesn't mean I'm responsible for it. He could have taken my sin by dying of old age, for the method of his death, I blame Jesus for electing it (for whatever reason he did) and the Romans for carrying it out.

The world and universe are not 6000 years old. The world is 4.5 billion years old, and the universe 13.7 billion. So you made a false assumption about what we all believe, and our rationale. *sigh* The second law of thermodynamics is universal, in closed or open systems. I should know, I'm a physicist. However, the second law only implies that entropy cannot decrease in a closed system. In an open system, the second law still applies, but it just doesn't necessitate an increase in entropy. At least you kindof knew the answer AAA, Arthur Durnan wouldn't know thermodynamics if he fell over it, he did well to get the spelling right.

Not really, no. I think he might have died of old age, peacefully in his sleep, so long as he did so in my sin. How many spear jabs and whips does it take? 1, 2, 60? Would the sin of the world have not been expiated had the Roman soldiers been slightly less cruel?

Graphic violence is okay so long as noone says any bad words or gets naked. Got it. Also, can anyone answer the question as to why jesus couldn't have been killed less violently? Like getting run over by the number 38 to from Victoria to Hackney?

Yes, because God has 2 arms, 2 legs, opposable thumbs, bowels to digest food, and is an obligate biped. So how can evolution be true? *rolls eyes* Think it might have been talking about his spiritual image there dude

No, that's not the only reason they were harmful. If you artificially massively increase the rate and extent of mutations, you are far more likely encourage maladaptive forms. Large mutations, or large numbers of mutations, are almost bound to be negative, because there are relatively few well adapted possibilities compared to many mal-adaptive possibilities. However, you're right that they weren't adapting. The reason is, they were not under the influence of ordinary natural selection. They weren't adapting "to" anything - they hadn't undergone a change in environment that would make the adapt. It means that, 99% of the time, natural selection acts to keep what is there that is well adapted, rather than change what is mal-adapted. It conserves what we already have that is good most of the time, and changes rarely. But we already knew that - most evolution and selection is conservative. These are not new findings, and they do not disprove evolution.

Carbon-14 dating can only date samples up to 55,000 years old, at a maximum. This is therefore a cock and bull story. And so is this. As for this so called experiment that disproved evolution, it proves only that: a) Large macro-mutations are almost always harmful, which we knew already b) That evolution is conservative, not adaptive, most of the time, which we knew already. *sigh*

Floatingaxe, Actually, a zygote is a single undifferentiated cell. It is a lot less ordered than I (by the physical definition of order) - a human being made up of billions of cells - each differentiated and forming complex organs with their own functions. In other words, going from a zygote to a fully grown human being implies a decrease in entropy - something that can only be achieved through the input of energy. Going from an ape-like ancestor to a man, may or may not involve a decrease in entropy. Is an ape-like ancestor more or less ordered than a human? It is a good question, and one that is not simply answered, even if we had the specimen in front of us. However, this is not a debate about evolution, it was a simple question about entropy, and I explained how entropy worked. Perhaps you should read the question as context for how I answered it, before criticising my answer.

No. I do not "believe thus and such" and fit everything around a belief. Beliefs are secondary. Things shouldn't be fitted around beliefs. Rather beliefs should fit around evidence. Evidence is primary in my life, not my belief in any one theory or religion. If my faith is in contrivance to the evidence, then the faith is gonna have to budge.

I look at it from a viewpoint of evidence, my dear girl. I proportion my belief to the evidence. Faith is important in my life, don't get me wrong, but it oughtn't replace or usurp what the evidence tells us. And the evidence overwhelmingly tells us that the earth is a very old place indeed, and that all life is related, including ourselves. This I will believe, and my faith is just going to have to fit around it.